Criminal – Man convicted of groping girls at high-school football game

Where the evidence showed the defendant groped at least three girls aged 11 to 15 years old during a high-school football game, his sexual battery convictions were affirmed.

Background

The trial court convicted Ronald Liptrap of aggravated sexual battery and two counts of sexual battery at a high school football game.

Analysis

Liptrap argues that the witnesses’ identification of him as the perpetrator “was based upon inconsistent and unreliable statements.” He suggests that the victims’ seeing him “in the vicinity after the touching occurred” is insufficient to prove his identity as the perpetrator. The record does not support his argument.

Alleghany County Sheriff’s Deputy Scott Dudding spoke with Liptrap before the game started. Liptrap was wearing a red hat. During the game, Liptrap posted up next to the trashcan by the men’s bathroom. As J.M. and M.H. walked past Liptrap he assaulted J.M. M.H. saw Liptrap grab J.M. J.M. turned around and Liptrap was standing with his hand out, smiling at her. Both J.M. and M.H. led two different police officers straight to Liptrap, who was still standing by the trashcan. M.P. and C.F. also identified Liptrap as the person who grabbed their buttocks.

All four witnesses described Liptrap as wearing a red hat and a plaid, flannel shirt. Each witness encountered Liptrap by the trashcan next to the restroom. The photo evidence corroborated the witnesses’ descriptions of Liptrap and his location where Covington Police Officer Agee confronted him. After M.H. led Agee to Liptrap, Agee confirmed Liptrap’s identity “by [his] Virginia ID.”

Considering all the evidence, the trial court reasonably could find that Liptrap was the perpetrator. Whether the witnesses’ identification of Liptrap as the perpetrator was based upon inconsistent and unreliable statements is not for this court to say. The trial court stated, “the [c]ourt has no problem with the identifications . . . he was the only one there with the clothing that matched [the] description.” This court will not disturb the trial court’s conclusion.

Intent

Liptrap also claims that “the evidence failed to establish that any of the touching[s] were consistent with the elements of a sexual battery.” Specifically, he argues there was insufficient proof that he acted “with the requisite intent to commit a sexual battery.” This court disagrees.

The record demonstrates that Liptrap was not at the Covington High School stadium in a place to watch a football game; he arrived at the stadium and situated himself away from the field, behind the stadium, in a high traffic area near the restrooms. In that location, he groped at least three girls aged 11 to 15 years old. He stood there alone during the game and “grabbed” and “squeeze[d]” the unsuspecting victims’ buttocks as they walked past. He was “smiling,” “staring,” and “gestur[ing]” at the young women in a way that made them feel “nervous” and “weird.”

The trial court was permitted to infer that Liptrap went to a high school football game to encounter young, minor students intending to sexually molest them or arouse and gratify himself. Furthermore, it properly considered his “facial expressions” and his groping of “multiple young ladies” in making its determination. Though no single piece of the Commonwealth’s evidence may have been sufficient to prove Liptrap’s intent, the “combined force of [the] many concurrent and related circumstances” was sufficient.

Affirmed.

Liptrap v. Commonwealth, Record No. 1597-25-3, July 21, 2026. CAV (unpublished opinion) (White). From the Circuit Court of Alleghany County (Stein). John S. Koehler (The Law Office of James Steele, PLLC, on brief), for appellant. Sandra M. Workman, Senior Assistant Attorney General (Jay Jones, Attorney General, on brief), for appellee. VLW 026-7-310. 8 pp.

Full-Text Opinion